Nikkor vs Canon L glass... Equal?

Started May 2, 2013 | Discussions thread
ammac12
Regular MemberPosts: 212
Like?
Re: Nikkor vs Canon L glass... Equal?
In reply to PHXAZCRAIG, May 2, 2013

PHXAZCRAIG wrote:

All I can comment on there is reach.   Many people have gone through the usual lament - 'long lenses cost too much', with the occasional 'long lenses are too big/heavy'.

Typical choices:

70-300vr - great bang for the buck, and in my opinion pretty light.

Sigma xx-500 zooms.   Not bad IQ at 400, stopped down, on a tripod.

Tamron 200-500 - very light, no VR, decent IQ stopped down.

AF-D 80-400vr - reasonably light, packs small, very good IQ to 300mm or a bit more, but needs a lot of stopping down at 400mm to get really good results.  VR poor.  AF slow.

** the above zooms give good results at their best, but make you work at it and have a fair amount of limitations **

Next step up in IQ is a 300F4, which is a very fine lens indeed without a TC.  With a 1.4TC, it's at least as good as the best of the above zooms, and generally better at a lower f-stop.

*** after this, you exceed $2000 ***

Personally, based on posted images mostly, I think the best of the under $2000 zooms is probably the 50-500 Sigma, either stabilized or non-stabilized.

Lately, there is the AF-S 80-400vr, which is clearly in a class above the under $2000 zooms.   Just how good it is remains to be decided, in terms of internet reputation.  I have one, and I'm a fan.   Still learning my way around it.  I also have the 300F AF-S and the AF-D 80-400.

I'd say that at it's worst, the IQ of the new 80-400 (wide open at 400mm) is up there with the best IQ of the zooms and somewhere around the 300F4 with 1.4TC.   It seems to me to be better than the prime + TC, a little.    It has two flaws:

1. poor tripod collar

2. price is high, and people freak at a variable aperture zoom costing more than $2000

I don't consider the variable aperture or F5.6 wide open at 400mm as a flaw, just a compromise to keep the size, weight and price down.

-- hide signature --

Craig
www.cjcphoto.net

Really good input here.  Sounds like I wouldn't miss a beat.  One concern I'm getting from this is to gain reach, I'm going variable aperture.  That's not going to be good for speed when trying to reach across the lacrosse field and catch my son taking a shot.  This hobby keeps getting more and more expensive!  Thanks again Craig.

adam

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow